D&D General My Problem(s) With Halflings, and How To Create Engaging/Interesting Fantasy Races

[Faolyn]

Here, I did one as well! One of these is not an elf. In the spirit of you cutting off the halfling's feet, I blurred out the ears in the pictures below. Pix taken from reddit.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Here, I did one as well! One of these is not an elf. In the spirit of you cutting off the halfling's feet, I blurred out the ears in the pictures below. Pix taken from reddit.

View attachment 141068

Yeah at least half of them would be a total toss up. More if it's possible that they could be races other than human or elf.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Here, I did one as well! One of these is not an elf. In the spirit of you cutting off the halfling's feet, I blurred out the ears in the pictures below. Pix taken from reddit.

View attachment 141068

You forgot one. I left the ears in to make it easier.

 

[Oofta]

With so many different depictions of elves you did miss one iconic image

 

[Chaosmancer]

Really...you can't think of ANY other differences between halflings and humans besides your 3 point list?

No, I was responding to Gammadoodler who when presented with that list said "Yes, if you take away all the ways they are different, they're basically the same."

I even acknowledged, in the post you are quoting with this line " I assume you are being glib, but let's take you at face value for a moment." that Gammadoodler himself likely believes that there are more than three things that should go on that list.

ONCE AGAIN can people actually read what I write! Is it so difficult to read what I write and actually understand it at a level that you don't waste time with posts like this that accuse me of things that not only did I never say, but that I SPECIFICALLY acknowledge the opposite point of?

Seriously, the rest of your post is a waste of my time, because it starts from the premise that despite the fact that I said that this 3 point list is inadequate that somehow I've held it up as the ultimate standard. I'm still going to read it, might even respond. But I'm getting sick and tired of this BS.

OK...let me add one difference you seem to have forgotten (even though it's been discussed about 600 times just in this thread) that is so fundamentally baked into the laid back friendly farmer halflings.

Halflings are not, generally, motivated by wealth. One of the fundamental draws for a stereotypical DnD adventure is killing things and collecting loot. In the US, modern society is built on a bedrock of systems involving the literal accumulation of weath well beyond the needs of an individual. What do you do with your millions? You use it to make more millions. What does the adventurer do with his treasures? Use them the become more powerful to kill better things to acquire better loot on a treadmill.

All the power hungry kingdoms (or dictatorships, empires sultanates, etc...) exist to build and gather more and more power. The elves, dwarves, and humans all do this. In fact, humans are the most power hungry of them all because they don't even have a traditional lane to stay in to build their power, they can be found everywhere some group wants to get a leg up on another group.

And halflings....halflings abide.

Yep, utter waste of time.

Oh no, they aren't motivated by wealth?! Let me just turn to my last few characters who made hundreds of thousands of gold.... Pyroclasm was motivated by knowledge. He was a noble and enjoyed the finer things in life, but he didn't care about wealth as much as wealth was a tool. Sir Kalten of Tamuli was motivated by honor and glory, Bryn Brightwood was motivated by Duty and and a desire to help people, Warren Sinder Raulnor was on a religious quest, Tharivol of New Springfield was trying to rebuild civilization after an apocalypse...

Weird, none of them were actually motivated by wealth. I, also, am not motivated by wealth. There are entire organizations called "non-profit organizations" who do this thing called charity. It is doing good for other people, it isn't being motivated by wealth.

Yes, it is interesting that halflings don't put a high value on gold, as a race, but it is far from unique and it doesn't change a thing about how most people play them. No more than any other choice does, because the rest of the world does care about wealth, and the character is going to need to use wealth to buy things. Part of the game. In fact, I just remembered a friend's character. A human shadow-sorcerer. Used to live on a farm. Looking for his lost kid and wife. Doesn't use the money we get from our missions because he doesn't care about money. But he does give his money to the other characters, to help them buy equipment and gear.

 

[Chaosmancer]

People keep using "short" like that's all it is. It's a dramatic understatement of the difference.

Approximately the same height and weight as a human toddler. And, in a fight, able to perform with equivalent effectiveness to a full-size adult human/dwarf/etc.

It is way..way..way..more of a difference than some cute little horns, pointy ears, or green skin.

In a similar way, a "positive mental outlook" understates having a fundamentally different worldview with different values, who make different decisions about how they choose to live.

It's an argument constructed on mischaracterization.

Halflings are no shorter or smaller than Kobolds, Goblins, Gnomes or Fairies. Who also are able to perform equivalent to the full-sized adult human in combat. I use it like that's "all it is" because it is something shared by many other races. It isn't more dramatic for a halfling than it is for any of those others.

Also, I have no idea what you are even trying to say with your point on "positive mental outlook". Yeah, a different outlook involves having different values. And if you have different values, you make different decisions. That's why I don't have any piercings, even though I have friends who do. Different decisions based on different values which arise from different outlooks on life.

Unless you think that the other races are incapable of having a positive mental outlook for the world, that there is not a single innocent soul amongst all the gnomes, humans, elves, ect ect ect.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

can people actually read what I write!

I don't think people really have time for that. It's basically a full time job.

 

[Faolyn]

Yeah at least half of them would be a total toss up. More if it's possible that they could be races other than human or elf.

Yup. The blue one is a genasi. Actually, I could have left the all of ears unblurred, because she had pointy, slightly webbed ears... just like a sea elf.

It just goes to show: unless you always depict elves with foot-long anime ears, they're almost invariably indistinguishable from humans or other human-shaped races.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

With so many different depictions of elves you did miss one iconic image
View attachment 141072

He's obviously a gnome (as are Santa's elves).

 

[Chaosmancer]

I asked you specifically, if the quote had been addressing dragonborn rather than humans, if you would be trying to make the case that halflings are basically dragonborn.

In fairness, you didn't answer.. for some very important reason I'm sure..which I took to mean that you would not. If that is not the case, then please clarify.

And here is the issue..you seem to think that the green boxes that are intended to give us glimpses into how the races might view their relationships with other races is equivalent to the text where the PHB says what the races are and what they can do. It isn't.

Like we're not all complaining about how haughty elves are, or how humorless dwarves are..Are we?

We aren't in a thread discussing elves, or discussing dwarves.

See, the reason I didn't say "yes" or "no" is because it was a pointless question. Let us imagine that the PHB was written differently, would we still use the same text as evidence? Maybe, maybe not. It would depend on how it was written differently. What about Dragonborn are similar to halfligs for you? Do you find them incredibly similar? No? Then why would it be written that they were?

The only reason it would be written, in your mind, if to prove that the test isn't worth discussing, because it would be clearly wrong. But, to reach that conclusion you had to create a text you believe to be clearly wrong. You aren't proving anything, you are side-stepping the evidence by trying to bring into question my integrity.

But fine, you want the truth? If we were discussing halflings, and the PHB said that halflings and dragonborn are "a lot alike" especially the dragonborn commoners and farmers... then I'd acknowledge that as a fact. I'd be curious why halflings are living in Dragonborn lands and allowing Dragonborn to protect them. I'd question what the dragonborn get out of that arrangement. I would treat that evidence EXACTLY the same way I'm treating it now.

And you'd probably post and say "but what if it said tieflings? Would you still treat it the same then?"